Implementation of a non ground meta interpreter for defeasible logic

Human reasoning is a fascinating and complex cognitive process that can be applied in different research areas such as philosophy, psychology, laws and financial. Unfortunately, developing supporting software (to those different areas) able to cope such as complex reasoning it’s difficult and requires a suitable logic abstract formalism. In this thesis we aim to develop a program, that has the job to evaluate a theory (a set of rules) w.r.t. a Goal, and provide some results such as “The Goal is derivable from the KB5 (of the theory)”. In order to achieve this goal we need to analyse different logics and choose the one that best meets our needs. In logic, usually, we try to determine if a given conclusion is logically implied by a set of assumptions T (theory). However, when we deal with programming logic we need an efficient algorithm in order to find such implications. In this work we use a logic rather similar to human logic. Indeed, human reasoning requires an extension of the first order logic able to reach a conclusion depending on not definitely true6 premises belonging to a incomplete set of knowledge. Thus, we implemented a defeasible logic7 framework able to manipulate defeasible rules. Defeasible logic is a non-monotonic logic designed for efficient defeasible reasoning by Nute (see Chapter 2). Those kind of applications are useful in laws area especially if they offer an implementation of an argumentation framework that provides a formal modelling of game. Roughly speaking, let the theory is the set of laws, a keyclaim is the conclusion that one of the party wants to prove (and the other one wants to defeat) and adding dynamic assertion of rules, namely, facts putted forward by the parties, then, we can play an argumentative challenge between two players and decide if the conclusion is provable or not depending on the different strategies performed by the players. Implementing a game model requires one more meta-interpreter able to evaluate the defeasible logic framework; indeed, according to Göedel theorem (see on page 127), we cannot evaluate the meaning of a language using the tools provided by the language itself, but we need a meta-language able to manipulate the object language8. Thus, rather than a simple meta-interpreter, we propose a Meta-level containing different Meta-evaluators. The former has been explained above, the second one is needed to perform the game model, and the last one will be used to change game execution and tree derivation strategies.

Tree regularized neural networks for key point analysis

This thesis contributes to the ArgMining 2021 shared task on Key Point Analysis. Key Point Analysis entails extracting and calculating the prevalence of a concise list of the most prominent talking points, from an input corpus. These talking points are usually referred to as key points. Key point analysis is divided into two subtasks: Key Point Matching, which involves assigning a matching score to each key point/argument pair, and Key Point Generation, which consists of the generation of key points. The task of Key Point Matching was approached using different models: a pretrained Sentence Transformers model and a tree-constrained Graph Neural Network were tested. The best model was the fine-tuned Sentence Transformers, which achieved a mean Average Precision score of 0.75, ranking 12 compared to other participating teams. The model was then used for the subtask of Key Point Generation using the extractive method in the selection of key point candidates and the model developed for the previous subtask to evaluate them.